111–120 of 307 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s really easy: go to Claude and ask it a novel question. It will generally reason its way to a perfectly good answer even if there is no direct example of it in the training data.
How do you know it’s a novel question?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He is not using appropriate models for this conclusion and neither is he using state of the art models in this research and moreover he doesn't have an expensive foundational model to build upon for 2d games. It's just a fun project. A serious attempt at video/vision would involve some probabilistic latent space that can be noised in ways that make sense for games in general. I think veo3 proves that ai can generaliz…
> generating a video under prompt constraints is basically playing a game Besides static puzzles (like a maze or jigsaw) I don't believe this analogy holds? A model working with prompt constraints that aren't evolving or being added over the course of "navigating" the generation of the model's output means it needs to process 0 new information that it didn't come up with itself — playing a game is different from othe…
If you work with model architecture and read papers, how could not know there are a flood of new ideas? Only few yield interesting results though. I kind of wonder if libraries like pytorch have hurt experimental development. So many basic concepts no one thinks about anymore because they just use the out of the box solutions. And maybe those solutions are great and those parts are "solved", but I am not sure. How ma…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s really easy: go to Claude and ask it a novel question. It will generally reason its way to a perfectly good answer even if there is no direct example of it in the training data.
When LLM's come up with answers to questions that aren't directly exampled in the training data, that's not proof at all that it reasoned its way there — it can very much still be pattern matching without insight from the actual code execution of the answer generation. If we were taking a walk and you asked me for an explanation for a mathematical concept I have not actually studied, I am fully capable of hazarding a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get why people are so invested in framing it this way. I'm sure there are ways to do the stated objective. John Carmack isn't even an AI guy why is he suddenly the standard.
Names >> all, and increasingly so. One phenomena that bared this to me, in a substantive way, was noticing an increasing # of reverent comments re: Geohot in odd places here, that are just as quickly replied to by people with a sense of how he works , as opposed to the keywords he associates himself with . But that only happens here AFAIK. Yapping, or, inducing people to yap about me, unfortunately, is much more sali…
The difference here is that your example shows a trivial statement and a change period of 3 days, whereas what Carmack is doing is taking years.
What John Carmack is exploring is pretty revealing. Train models to play 2D video games to a superhuman level, then ask them to play a level they have not seen before or another 2D video game they have not seen before. The transfer function is negative. So, in my definition, no intelligence has been developed, only expertise in a narrow set of tasks. It’s apparently much easier to scare the masses with visions of ASI…
He is not using appropriate models for this conclusion and neither is he using state of the art models in this research and moreover he doesn't have an expensive foundational model to build upon for 2d games. It's just a fun project. A serious attempt at video/vision would involve some probabilistic latent space that can be noised in ways that make sense for games in general. I think veo3 proves that ai can generaliz…
It doesn't. And you said it yourself:
> generating a video under prompt constraints is basically playing a game.
No. It's neither generating a game (that people can play) nor is it playing a game (it's generating a video).
Since it's not a model of the world in any sense of the word, there are issues with even the most basic object permanenece. E.g. here's veo3 generating a GTA-style video. Oh look, the car spins 360 and ends up on a completely different street than the one it was driving down previously: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja2PVllZcsI
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know it’s a novel question?
It's not exactly difficult to come up with a question that's so unusual the chance of it being in the training set is effectively zero.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You can trivially prove this yourself. Given the long list of dead philosophers of mind, if you have a trivial proof, would you mind providing a link?
Just go and ask ChatGPT or Claude something that can't possibly be in its training set. Make something up. If it is only memorising answers then it will be impossible for it to get the correct result. A simple nonsense programming task would suffice. For example "write a Python function to erase every character from a string unless either of its adjacent characters are also adjacent to it in the alphabet. The string…
They generate statistically plausible answers (to simplify the answer) based on the training set and weights they have.
What John Carmack is exploring is pretty revealing. Train models to play 2D video games to a superhuman level, then ask them to play a level they have not seen before or another 2D video game they have not seen before. The transfer function is negative. So, in my definition, no intelligence has been developed, only expertise in a narrow set of tasks. It’s apparently much easier to scare the masses with visions of ASI…
And like I get it, it’s fun to complain about the obnoxious and irrational AGI people. But the discussion about how people are using these things in their everyday lives is way more interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> generating a video under prompt constraints is basically playing a game Besides static puzzles (like a maze or jigsaw) I don't believe this analogy holds? A model working with prompt constraints that aren't evolving or being added over the course of "navigating" the generation of the model's output means it needs to process 0 new information that it didn't come up with itself — playing a game is different from othe…
[flagged]